commons-issues mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From "Sebb (JIRA)" <j...@apache.org>
Subject [jira] [Commented] (IO-279) Tailer erroneously consider file as new
Date Thu, 07 Jun 2012 23:46:23 GMT

    [ https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/IO-279?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=13291427#comment-13291427
] 

Sebb commented on IO-279:
-------------------------

There's a general problem here, in that it's not possible to obtain both the file position
and the current timestamp (System or File) as part of a single transaction.

However, the critical case is where the File timestamp is greater than the System timestamp,
so it does not matter if the File timestamp is measured too early or the System timestamp
is measured too late.
                
> Tailer erroneously consider file as new
> ---------------------------------------
>
>                 Key: IO-279
>                 URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/IO-279
>             Project: Commons IO
>          Issue Type: Bug
>    Affects Versions: 2.0.1
>            Reporter: Sergio Bossa
>
> Tailer sometimes erroneously consider the tailed file as new, forcing a repositioning
at the start of the file: I'm still unable to reproduce this in a test case, because it only
happens to me with huge log files during Apache Tomcat startup.
> This is the piece of code causing the problem:
> // See if the file needs to be read again
> if (length > position) {
>     // The file has more content than it did last time
>     last = System.currentTimeMillis();
>     position = readLines(reader);
> } else if (FileUtils.isFileNewer(file, last)) {
>     /* This can happen if the file is truncated or overwritten
>         * with the exact same length of information. In cases like
>         * this, the file position needs to be reset
>         */
>     position = 0;
>     reader.seek(position); // cannot be null here
>     // Now we can read new lines
>     last = System.currentTimeMillis();
>     position = readLines(reader);
> }
> What probably happens is that the new file content is about to be written on disk, the
date is already updated but content is still not flushed, so actual length is untouched and
there you go.
> In other words, I think there should be some better method to verify the condition above,
rather than relying only on dates: keeping and comparing the hash code of the latest line
may be a solution, but may hurt performances ... other ideas?

--
This message is automatically generated by JIRA.
If you think it was sent incorrectly, please contact your JIRA administrators: https://issues.apache.org/jira/secure/ContactAdministrators!default.jspa
For more information on JIRA, see: http://www.atlassian.com/software/jira

        

Mime
View raw message